Crowdsourcing JFK: What did Gerald Ford say about the Warren Commission?

“I recall see former president and Warren Commission member Gerald Ford make an ‘unusual’ statement on TV in the mid 1990s. In reference to the Warren Commission, he said, ‘We told the truth, we just didn’t tell the whole truth.'”

“Aside from seeing / hearing him say that,” the reader went on. “I recently read a Jan. 1996 interview with James Hosty, Hosty mentions Ford’s remark verbatim and said he wished Ford had said that sooner because he (Hosty) would have used it in his new book at that time before it went into publication (Assignment: Oswald).

“Trying to find that 4-second remark on a YouTube video is like looking for the proverbial needle in a haystack. Do you have any idea how or where I can find the footage of Ford saying that?”

I’m not familiar with that Ford comment. Maybe readers can help. Anybody know anything about this?

Share this:

21 comments

There is a Preface by Gerald Ford to a book titled “A Presidential Legacy and the Warren Commission”, Flatsigned Press, Nashville, 2007. In that Preface, President Ford writes that the CIA hid evidence from the Warren Commission about the CIA/Mafia plots to kill Castro, but makes a distinction between being involved in the JFK assassination and covering it up to hide the CIA/Mafia plots. Ford writes, “Given the new facts, could there have been a conspiracy? Conceivably. But no verified evidence to date shows a link to, or any direct involvement by, any government agency, federal employees, or subversive group.” p. XXIII.

I have to ask, John, if you believe the report that Oswald threatened Kennedy at the Cuban embassy? Because that’s quite an amazing coincidence that the same guy gets a front row seat on the motorcade route six weeks later.

I read Ford’s preface and you don’t know whether to think he was clueless or completely disenguous.

Two pages after telling everyone how bad people are who claim the WC is a fraud, the official report states JFK was first hit in the neck. Does anyone who’ve seen the entry wound in the autopsy photos and clothing believe that’s his “neck?” Are u frigging kidding me? Ask any four-year-old where the neck is and I guarantee you he won’t point to the mid- shoulder.

But that is so typical of the crap our govt has been serving on this issue for 50 years. Amend an obvious fact to make your case rather than build your case on obvious facts. And then point fingers at everyone who calls you on it.

That’s why the American people never bought the official story, not because of conspiracy theorists. If Oswald did it alone, then there’s no reason to amend a SINGLE fact.

And btw, I believe it was Ford who had the wording changed to say JFK was first struck in the neck and not the shoulder.

OK, but what do you think of my main point? If the WC was an honest investigation looking for the truth, why would they lie about the position of the entrance wound? Not too mention never mention the backwards motion of Kennedy in the final shot from Z, etc., etc.

Do you see how all this confusion about the case was NOT caused by conspiracy theorists?

Staff wrote the bullet entered the back which was changed by Ford to ‘base of neck’. This is a big difference. Even if he didn’t have access to the autopsy photos (which I doubt), the FBI’s report described the lower location of the bullet holes in Kennedy’s clothing, which was more than enough to raise an eyebrow.

During his confirmation hearings for Vice President in November 1973, Gerald Ford was asked about using excerpts from the top secret 1/27/1964 Warren Commission transcript in his book, Portrait of the Assassin. His reply was an utter falsehood.

Chairman: Now, Mr. Ford, it has been stated that as a member of the Warren Commission you voluntarily accepted the constraints which all the members of the commission accepted, providing that you would not publish or release any of the proceedings of the Commission. You did, however, in association with another, publish a book and provide material for a Life magazine article on the proceedings of the Commission. Do you feel this was a violation of your agreement?

Ford: To the best of my recollection, Mr. Chairman, there was no such agreement, but, even if there was, the book I published in conjunction with a member of my staff…we wrote the book, but we did not use in that book any material other than the material that was in the 26 volumes of testimony and exhibits that were subsequently made public…

Later a member of a House committee suggested to Ford that he might have committed perjury during his Senate testimony; Ford said that he hadn’t understood the meaning of the chairman’s question.

I remind readers that the point of this post is NOT to debate Gerald Ford’s credibility . The point is finding NEW INFORMATION. The reader is looking for video of Ford talking about the Warren Commission. If you have information that can help please send it in the form of a link or a citation.

The only similar remarks by Gerald Ford which I could find were on a History Channel documentary of the Warren Commission. Ford stated “It was wise to get it (the Warren Commission Report) to the public before the elections of 1964. We understood it was important to get the report out publicly as quickly as possible–and at the same time do a good job.”

Obviously, this is far from openly stating the Warren Commission did not tell the whole truth–but it is worth noting that the final 15 minutes of the documentary does go on to question whether the commission was given ample time to find the whole truth. The final portion of the documentary also explains how a member of the Warren Commission, Sen. Richard Russell, saw his own skeptical views obfuscated in the Warren Report.

So, is it possible that maybe your friend’s memory may be “blending” these final conclusions?

Also possible is that youtube has stricken the video/remarks from being easily searched (or even taken down the posting). I recently went through my youtube history and was surprised to find quite a few of the videos I have watched are now DELETED. The videos which were deleted had no file name or any way of knowing exactly WHAT was deleted–just a blank box that said “this video has been removed.”

If the WC was to conduct a serious and thorough investigation, then why would the new president appoint Allen Dulles to be on the commission? All of the details of the assassination are very important, but the debate rages on endlessly. consider an alternative tact; looking at the big picture and using a little common sense. It’s clear that something occurred that day in Dallas other than what the WC report tells us. LBJ appoints Allen Dulles to be on the wc, the very same Allen Dulles that JFK just humiliated by firing him. Wouldn’t the president realize that this conflict of interest could sabotage the report either by mischief or perception? Dulles is the last man on earth that should have been chosen for the WC…………logic and common sense tells me that LBJ was more concerned with having ‘friendly’ WC members and a member with a grudge against Kennedy was better yet. If you don’t agree with that assessment, then you would have to conclude that LBJ was an idiot. He was a bad guy and a crook etc., but he wasn’t an idiot. LBJ puts Dulles on the committee to investigate the murder of a guy that dulles would like to get even with; I believe that wasn’t a blunder but a coverup………..